mborn Loc: Massachusetts

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

TheDman Loc: USA

Exactly, which is why Photoshop cannot make destructive edits to a raw file.

Dngallagher Loc: Wilmington De.

You are right of course. I make use of DNG files, so I convert my nef to dng prior to any editing, so as long as I round trip the image thru Lightroom I get non-destructive edits from Photoshop.

gemlenz Loc: Gilbert Arizona

:thumbup:

Thombar Loc: Hominy, OK

Let's hope the trend will continue...

:D :lol:

cavey1732 Loc: Corvallis, OR

I opted for the ($9.99/month) photographers plan of Photoshop CC. I had alreadypurchased Lightroom 5 separately. I think I heard that lightroom is included in the photographers plan. Is this so?
If it is I should get the CC version of Lr so that I'll get the upcoming upgrade to version 6.

Dngallagher Loc: Wilmington De.

Yes. Lightroom, Bridge and Photoshop are all part of the photographers plan.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

I can't understand this nonsense about not renting software. Unless a person authors a piece of software, you pay for a license. The method of payment doesn't directly change the software. SMH . . .

If you feel better, then pay $360 up front - in all likelihood, if you purchased a perpetual license, you would pay a lot more for LR and PS, and you would probably be upgrading it in 3 yrs anyway.

OonlyBonly

:thumbup:

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

That is $9.99 per what - day, week, month, year ??

Dngallagher Loc: Wilmington De.

Per month.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

Plus tax, which in MA brings the total to a whopping $10.61 US, or $127.32/year.

My photography budget is significantly higher than that, so that expense is down in the noise. For that matter, it would amount to 2-3 cups of coffee per month if I drank coffee.

For a deal that gives me programs that I use as much as I do, it's a no-brainer (although I exerted my brain thinking about it for a couple months initially).

As stated by others, LR is sufficiient for 80-90% of my images. 100% of my images go into LR (I've been hooked on the catalog for about 8-9 years now) and a few images go into PS for polishing.

In particular, the adjustment brush isn't something I handle well. It's waving a fuzzy round dot around and sometimes my fingers don't make it go where I want it to go. I find creating masks in PS significantly easier. People with finer motor control may not need that, but it sure helps me.

Moreover, there are so many other things that PS can do that I don't really even know half of them yet, let alone mastering them. I have a long way to go. But I've found the shake reduction useful (in minor shake cases) and I use layers in most of my image work in PS. PS also helps me make signs and posters for my business. That amounts to about 25-30% of my PS usage.

At Christmas we had a large family group so I took some group shots. The family is very chaotic, so even taking about 30 pictures of the group, there were no pictures where everyone looked good. Photoshop allowed me to swap heads to get a good composite of everyone.

I feel some shudders coming at me through my keyboard when I describe that sort of PP. But it leaves the family with a memory, and nobody was seriously transmogrified (at least in that event) so the family was happy with it.

Photoshop is not only extremely useful, It's FUN. And that's why I'm into photography.

Bozsik Loc: Orangevale, California

:thumbup:

Bozsik Loc: Orangevale, California

The whole LR program doesn't even cost 360 dollars. I also have the disk to load the program when I need to reinstall - if that should happen. The upgrade would have been cheaper. A couple of hundred dollars cheaper since I don't upgrade each version. The upgrade versions were about 79.00 to 89.00. That would be once every three years for me, instead of 120.00/yr.

I don't plan on upgrading CS6 unless they discontinue their support for new devices. Then that is a matter of lack of customer support over upselling to those who already are trapped in the cloud. If a company is unwilling to offer updates for new camera bodies, etc., then I will go with a company that regards customers in higher value. Adobe has never been a company known for their customer support. Their products are good quality, though.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

A company cannot afford to have a lot of customers like you. No one to my knowledge is trapped in a cloud. And there are over 1000 new features and enhancements, in the three upgraded versions since CS6. I would say, looking at it from a different perspective, that you are the trapped one - using 4 yr old software hoping that support continues.

Adobe unquestionably has the best software out there - so many pros, graphic arts departments, schools and academics and amateurs use it. Luckily they help keep the revenue flowing.

The 3 yr upgrade cycle I suppose made sense when Adobe upgraded their software every 2 yrs. You were never that far behind - but in the two years since CC, Photoshop has undergone two upgrades, and one major rewrite.

Hey, I get it - you just don't want to spend the money, and you could care less if the company that writes the software that you use goes belly up. Thank god there are paying customers out there that support software publishers so they can continue to build and refine their software, as Adobe has.

Just one more point - I have only heard complaints about CC from those who haven't tried it. And I have yet to hear of anyone who has tried it, deciding to roll back to CS6 because they didn't think that CC2014 was worth it. If you have, I'd love to see a link. I will never understand this kind of logic.